ok, whatever you say. Let me know when you get your full-body containment and disguise suit manufactured. I'll laugh at you from my short-sighted camera-free city. btw, where the fuck do you live that has no gov't? On a rock in a lake?
Allright, everything else aside (magic camera beam indeed!! that was a good one) , this debate is clearly being fought at the local level.
Who installed those cameras in Florida? The US gov't? I thought it was the city of Tampa? My opinion here is that, yes, the FBI, et.al, are breathless with anticipation at the thought of installing a bazillion camera's but they won't go near it until enough municipalities have gone there first. Cities like Tampa are the FBI's "trial ballon." Until there are enough of these things installed (don't know what that number is) and public perception changes, the FBI won't get involved. Therefore: the way to fight these things is to get involved with your local government to ensure these things don't come to your city. It isn't that hard. Ever been to City council meeting????
It's got nothing to do with making the government "promise-pretty-please" not to use it. There's no promise about it. If you don't like the camera's work with the gov't to get them taken out. This shit starts at the local level. BTW, your solution is still to wear a mask, I take it?
disagree. It seems that ever and anon, everyone on/. thinks that the way to get even with "the man" is to hack something together (or apart) in order to challenge them. In my mind, that's wrong. The way to challenge the man is to undo what's fucked up to begin with.
For instance, your municipality installing cameras? If you feel strongly about it, What are you gonna do - walk around with a fucking mask on? The way to fight that problem is by getting the camera's pulled out and sent to England, where they love them. Putting a mask on or shooting the damn things doesn't do anything to rectify the erosion of our liberties. Sooner or later the man is going to be able to get what he wants and it will be by utilizing several technologies. In your scenario, you won't be able to walk out of your house without a mask, voice encoder and a cape.
Also, this isn't about "fightig technology". It's about maintaining our liberties and making our governments do what we want them to do. Even those who are so lazy that they don't care about this stuff will sit up when the first story comes out about how the technology was used by a bank to catch a deliquent customer (or something similar).
This really is stupid: "paedophiles will be eliminated from the society before they rape children"
How, exactly, are you going to do this? Test everyone to see if they're a pedophile? These cameras and software might help catch pedophiles who have escaped from prison (and how many of those are there??) but how is it going to catch a pedophile who's never been charged as such? I can see it now "AAHAA - see that guy over there? He looks like a pedophile, go get him".
things are really starting to get tight. All of these stories about traffic cameras, facial recognition and monitoring cameras just go together too well. It seems like you can believe in one of two things:
1. This gradually closing surveillance net that will be able to track you anytime you leave your house is a result of the unwitting acts of many legislatures/public officials which result in "skynet". or
2. This really is a "boil the frog" approach by government to keeping tabs on everything. IOW, they really *are* out to get you.
I think that it's probably the first but the end result is the same. More people need to make their voices heard on this type of stuff. We here in America, in general, seem to depend on the media to out this kind of stuff but we should not be so lackidasical (sp?) about it. This really is important. Oh, btw, the "traffic management" cameras are just stupid. A highway isn't like a train where you can divert trains onto extra tracks. There just aren't any extra 6-lane highways laying around. Sure, you might "divert" traffic from the highway to surrounding streets but what do you think will happen when 6 lanes of traffic gets "diverted" to a 2 or 4 land suburban avenue.......
that Palm and MS are going for. Palm's are cheap and Pocket PC's are expensive (by comparison). The strange thing is that even though one costs half as much as the other, they are always compared. Kind of like comparing a Ford Escort and a BMW.
of the article (and others I've read) are that the broadcasters return the analog spectrum at no charge. They *did* recieve the digital spectrum for free after all. It seems quite clear that the government didn't intend to have to bid to get the spectrum back.
while it brings in alot of $$$ has always seemed somewhat shady to me. While this article isn't well balanced, it has always seemed like the users of that spectrum have been well-funded businesses and I get nervous when they get in too tight with the regulating agency. A breath-taking example of this coziness is that the NAB would have the balls to propose auctioning their old analog spectrum and keeping the money. And yes, I read the article and if you don't think they won't manage to stuff most of that money in their own pockets, you're crazy. I thought that by giving the networks free spectrum for HDTV (or whatever it may be called by now) the Gov't and, by extension, the people *were* speeding up the process and cutting broadcasters costs.....sheesh.
How have the shot themselves in the head? The link mentions that their chips are very popular for laptops in particular and "value" systems in general. I haven't noticed a stampede of people tossing Windows from their laptops in order to run Linux or any other OS, for that matter. They might lose a bit of business but my bet is that it's so small, it'll be equivelant to a rounding error on their balance sheet. Remember, this is all about business.
is very hard. If you're a consultant, it is often difficult to get a sense of what exactly your client wants. I say this as most clients aren't even sure themselves what it is they need/want/desire. It often takes an n-way meeting to iron these things out. If, otoh, you're an employee, you often get left out of things. You have to be *very* proactive in most organizations to make sure that you are still in the loop. In addition, it is very easy to get fucked as you're not around to defend yourself.
I'm not sure how representative a shop running Notes is. Anyways, I tend to agree with you. What would a small business (fewer than 50 employees or so) use linux for? Maybe an internal web or database server but that's about it. Not like any of the MS stuff will run on a linux server. For Calendaring, Act!, authentication, printing, file sharing and other stuff, it's all NT/2000.
but not on the desktop. In any event, I think you're overstating the case. Let's face it, if IBM threw its' weight behind an abacus and said it could solve the NYSE's problems, they would probably get the contract. The key here is having IBM as an advocate. As important to the Linux crowd as this is, it seems to me that it is only incidental to IBM. They certainly could have used any of their own operating systems for this work. I'm sure what matters more to IBM is that they get to poke MS with this stick. All the better for us that it has linux written on it....:)
the way that ISP's charge if the movement ever gets any real momentum going. They'll switch to a price per meg instead of all you can eat. Either that or they will change the TOS to forbid it. That being the case, only business class lines will allow this and I don't see too many business setting up free wireless access points, either.
I hope you're not a consultant. You aren't doing your clients, friends and family any favors by recommending such low-end systems. Those same people that are buying 600mhz machines this year will be looking for 1 ghz+ machines next year as family members (kids in particular) wonder why they can't play any new games or XP slows to a crawl.....
This is far too late and nobody will read it but: what I *love* is the "continued use" phrase. This sounds like a health warning: "Continued use of heroin presents a serious health risk" What did they expect would happen after they killed Napster (right or wrong, you decide) that people would stop using CD burners?
I've actually had to underclock my 1.3 ghz system to 1.0 or 1.1ghz to keep it stable. Swapped proc's and everything. On the plus side, it runs a bit cooler....
It was from the pro-microsoft group and was essentially a pre-written letter, complete with a stamped envelope. All I had to do was sign it and send it off. I chose, instead, to consign it to the tender mercies of the waste-management industry....
well then they better ask
on
IBM Wants Linux
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Stallman. He is, after all, in charge of the entire open source effort.
Interesting, but why would you think that the first store would take back the "open-source" wrench to repair it? It isn't likey, even if it was a real wrench...:) Your indentification of the flaw in the analogy is, in a strict sense, right on. However, aren't all of these things just tools to get work done? Whether they are actual boxes with chips in them or Itellectual (sp) Property, they are just tools. That's how I look at it anyway. Who knows, maybe I'm just simple but I think that debates like this keep pushing linux closer and closer to the edge of oblivion.
on the planet and is a great example of why Linux is still a cute little backwater in the otherwise huge *desktop* software market. How many people outside of/. care enough about whether the software they are using is "free as in beer" or "free as in speech" or what license it is issued under that they would switch to a competing product? How many? 100 - 1,000 - 10,000? Laughable numbers compared to the installed user base of Windows. Look, most people view software as a tool. Think of it as a Craftsman wrench. They only get bent out of shape when it doesn't work and what happens then? You think your average Joe will fire up a forge in his garage to cast a newer, better wrench or repair a broken one? No, he's going to take it back to the store.
And now we come to the really interesting part of the argument: what happens when there is one store that sells that tool while their competition sells tools that, while workable, have to be assembled from their component pieces but are purported to be better as their designs are on the internet for all to see and copy? Joe average user wants to get the job done and the company that publishes their specs on the internet can take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut, he goes to the store that provides what he needs.
This is the situation in which we find ourselves. For all of this hoopla, the real problem of trying to build a product comparable to windows is being gradually tuned out. For the life of me, I can't seriously think that MS is "afraid" of any open source initiative with this kind of shit going on. I don't know who coined the phrase but "lead follow or get out of the way" applies wonderfully here. The open source community is like two birds fighing over a dead squirrel in the road with an 18 wheeler bearing down on them.
little tidbit is mentioned early on: the fact that Covad will need $200 million more in financing to reach profitability in *2003*. Lord only knows where this cash will come from. Even with elimination of debt and whatnot, it seems like a long shot. 'Course, I'm not a financing expert either but it seems like an awful lot of cash to raise in a market that is very skeptical (sp) of the telecom sector.
Slashdot Mirror
ok, whatever you say. Let me know when you get your full-body containment and disguise suit manufactured. I'll laugh at you from my short-sighted camera-free city. btw, where the fuck do you live that has no gov't? On a rock in a lake?
Allright, everything else aside (magic camera beam indeed!! that was a good one) , this debate is clearly being fought at the local level.
Who installed those cameras in Florida? The US gov't? I thought it was the city of Tampa? My opinion here is that, yes, the FBI, et.al, are breathless with anticipation at the thought of installing a bazillion camera's but they won't go near it until enough municipalities have gone there first. Cities like Tampa are the FBI's "trial ballon." Until there are enough of these things installed (don't know what that number is) and public perception changes, the FBI won't get involved. Therefore: the way to fight these things is to get involved with your local government to ensure these things don't come to your city. It isn't that hard. Ever been to City council meeting????
It's got nothing to do with making the government "promise-pretty-please" not to use it. There's no promise about it. If you don't like the camera's work with the gov't to get them taken out. This shit starts at the local level. BTW, your solution is still to wear a mask, I take it?
disagree. It seems that ever and anon, everyone on /. thinks that the way to get even with "the man" is to hack something together (or apart) in order to challenge them. In my mind, that's wrong. The way to challenge the man is to undo what's fucked up to begin with.
For instance, your municipality installing cameras? If you feel strongly about it, What are you gonna do - walk around with a fucking mask on? The way to fight that problem is by getting the camera's pulled out and sent to England, where they love them. Putting a mask on or shooting the damn things doesn't do anything to rectify the erosion of our liberties. Sooner or later the man is going to be able to get what he wants and it will be by utilizing several technologies. In your scenario, you won't be able to walk out of your house without a mask, voice encoder and a cape.
Also, this isn't about "fightig technology". It's about maintaining our liberties and making our governments do what we want them to do. Even those who are so lazy that they don't care about this stuff will sit up when the first story comes out about how the technology was used by a bank to catch a deliquent customer (or something similar).
This really is stupid: "paedophiles will be eliminated from the society before they rape children"
How, exactly, are you going to do this? Test everyone to see if they're a pedophile? These cameras and software might help catch pedophiles who have escaped from prison (and how many of those are there??) but how is it going to catch a pedophile who's never been charged as such? I can see it now "AAHAA - see that guy over there? He looks like a pedophile, go get him".
things are really starting to get tight. All of these stories about traffic cameras, facial recognition and monitoring cameras just go together too well. It seems like you can believe in one of two things:
1. This gradually closing surveillance net that will be able to track you anytime you leave your house is a result of the unwitting acts of many legislatures/public officials which result in "skynet". or
2. This really is a "boil the frog" approach by government to keeping tabs on everything. IOW, they really *are* out to get you.
I think that it's probably the first but the end result is the same. More people need to make their voices heard on this type of stuff. We here in America, in general, seem to depend on the media to out this kind of stuff but we should not be so lackidasical (sp?) about it. This really is important. Oh, btw, the "traffic management" cameras are just stupid. A highway isn't like a train where you can divert trains onto extra tracks. There just aren't any extra 6-lane highways laying around. Sure, you might "divert" traffic from the highway to surrounding streets but what do you think will happen when 6 lanes of traffic gets "diverted" to a 2 or 4 land suburban avenue.......
that Palm and MS are going for. Palm's are cheap and Pocket PC's are expensive (by comparison). The strange thing is that even though one costs half as much as the other, they are always compared. Kind of like comparing a Ford Escort and a BMW.
of the article (and others I've read) are that the broadcasters return the analog spectrum at no charge. They *did* recieve the digital spectrum for free after all. It seems quite clear that the government didn't intend to have to bid to get the spectrum back.
while it brings in alot of $$$ has always seemed somewhat shady to me. While this article isn't well balanced, it has always seemed like the users of that spectrum have been well-funded businesses and I get nervous when they get in too tight with the regulating agency. A breath-taking example of this coziness is that the NAB would have the balls to propose auctioning their old analog spectrum and keeping the money. And yes, I read the article and if you don't think they won't manage to stuff most of that money in their own pockets, you're crazy. I thought that by giving the networks free spectrum for HDTV (or whatever it may be called by now) the Gov't and, by extension, the people *were* speeding up the process and cutting broadcasters costs.....sheesh.
touche' - excellent point. I wonder if this little tidbit has dawned on them yet....:)
How have the shot themselves in the head? The link mentions that their chips are very popular for laptops in particular and "value" systems in general. I haven't noticed a stampede of people tossing Windows from their laptops in order to run Linux or any other OS, for that matter. They might lose a bit of business but my bet is that it's so small, it'll be equivelant to a rounding error on their balance sheet. Remember, this is all about business.
It looks like it would cost a fortune. Certainly alot more than those snap together cubes I've seen in the past.
is very hard. If you're a consultant, it is often difficult to get a sense of what exactly your client wants. I say this as most clients aren't even sure themselves what it is they need/want/desire. It often takes an n-way meeting to iron these things out. If, otoh, you're an employee, you often get left out of things. You have to be *very* proactive in most organizations to make sure that you are still in the loop. In addition, it is very easy to get fucked as you're not around to defend yourself.
I'm not sure how representative a shop running Notes is. Anyways, I tend to agree with you. What would a small business (fewer than 50 employees or so) use linux for? Maybe an internal web or database server but that's about it. Not like any of the MS stuff will run on a linux server. For Calendaring, Act!, authentication, printing, file sharing and other stuff, it's all NT/2000.
but not on the desktop. In any event, I think you're overstating the case. Let's face it, if IBM threw its' weight behind an abacus and said it could solve the NYSE's problems, they would probably get the contract. The key here is having IBM as an advocate. As important to the Linux crowd as this is, it seems to me that it is only incidental to IBM. They certainly could have used any of their own operating systems for this work. I'm sure what matters more to IBM is that they get to poke MS with this stick. All the better for us that it has linux written on it....:)
the way that ISP's charge if the movement ever gets any real momentum going. They'll switch to a price per meg instead of all you can eat. Either that or they will change the TOS to forbid it. That being the case, only business class lines will allow this and I don't see too many business setting up free wireless access points, either.
I hope you're not a consultant. You aren't doing your clients, friends and family any favors by recommending such low-end systems. Those same people that are buying 600mhz machines this year will be looking for 1 ghz+ machines next year as family members (kids in particular) wonder why they can't play any new games or XP slows to a crawl.....
This is far too late and nobody will read it but: what I *love* is the "continued use" phrase. This sounds like a health warning: "Continued use of heroin presents a serious health risk" What did they expect would happen after they killed Napster (right or wrong, you decide) that people would stop using CD burners?
I've actually had to underclock my 1.3 ghz system to 1.0 or 1.1ghz to keep it stable. Swapped proc's and everything. On the plus side, it runs a bit cooler....
It was from the pro-microsoft group and was essentially a pre-written letter, complete with a stamped envelope. All I had to do was sign it and send it off. I chose, instead, to consign it to the tender mercies of the waste-management industry....
Stallman. He is, after all, in charge of the entire open source effort.
that day and what license he/she is publishing under...:)
Interesting, but why would you think that the first store would take back the "open-source" wrench to repair it? It isn't likey, even if it was a real wrench...:) Your indentification of the flaw in the analogy is, in a strict sense, right on. However, aren't all of these things just tools to get work done? Whether they are actual boxes with chips in them or Itellectual (sp) Property, they are just tools. That's how I look at it anyway. Who knows, maybe I'm just simple but I think that debates like this keep pushing linux closer and closer to the edge of oblivion.
on the planet and is a great example of why Linux is still a cute little backwater in the otherwise huge *desktop* software market. How many people outside of /. care enough about whether the software they are using is "free as in beer" or "free as in speech" or what license it is issued under that they would switch to a competing product? How many? 100 - 1,000 - 10,000? Laughable numbers compared to the installed user base of Windows. Look, most people view software as a tool. Think of it as a Craftsman wrench. They only get bent out of shape when it doesn't work and what happens then? You think your average Joe will fire up a forge in his garage to cast a newer, better wrench or repair a broken one? No, he's going to take it back to the store.
And now we come to the really interesting part of the argument: what happens when there is one store that sells that tool while their competition sells tools that, while workable, have to be assembled from their component pieces but are purported to be better as their designs are on the internet for all to see and copy? Joe average user wants to get the job done and the company that publishes their specs on the internet can take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut, he goes to the store that provides what he needs.
This is the situation in which we find ourselves. For all of this hoopla, the real problem of trying to build a product comparable to windows is being gradually tuned out. For the life of me, I can't seriously think that MS is "afraid" of any open source initiative with this kind of shit going on. I don't know who coined the phrase but "lead follow or get out of the way" applies wonderfully here. The open source community is like two birds fighing over a dead squirrel in the road with an 18 wheeler bearing down on them.
little tidbit is mentioned early on: the fact that Covad will need $200 million more in financing to reach profitability in *2003*. Lord only knows where this cash will come from. Even with elimination of debt and whatnot, it seems like a long shot. 'Course, I'm not a financing expert either but it seems like an awful lot of cash to raise in a market that is very skeptical (sp) of the telecom sector.